Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Early history of Gowa and Talloq/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 6 August 2019 [1].

Early history of Gowa and Talloq

edit
Nominator(s): HaEr48 (talk) and Masjawad99 (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This article is about the early history of Gowa and Talloq, a pair of kingdoms which were to be one of strongest powers in pre-colonial Indonesia. The article was initially written and passed to GA by Karaeng Matoaya, but he hasn't been active since. Recently, Masjawad99 and myself tried to expand and improve it further. We nominated it for FA but after a few responses (all responded to and none seems negative) it was closed for inactivity (see archive1). Hopefully we'll be able to get more feedback now. HaEr48 (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mimihitam

edit
  • I think the scope of "Early history of Gowa and Talloq" would have to be defined more clearly in the beginning of the article rather than in the "Aftermath". Who made the periodisation of early, middle, or late history of Gowa and Talloq? What separates the early period from latter periods? Is it because it was a pre-Islamic period, or is it because it was the time when Gowa was rising significantly? It would be helpful if you could clarify this in the article.
  • Since Gowa would be Islamised after this period, could you perhaps clarify the (animistic?) belief that they had during this "early period"? Maybe it could be described in the "Background" section.
  • "the veneration of the divine origins of nobility and the influential role of the bissu priesthood remained powerful obstacles for Islamization" --> isn't the bissu part of the Bugis culture?
    • Bissu also existed in pre-Islamic Makassar society according to the source cited (btw, I fixed the pages, it's pp. 117-119, not pp. 142-144). Or at least a similar concept; Ahmad Sewang (2005, pp. 152, 176) lists daeng ta alakaya as a Makassarese synonym for bissu (but even the term bissu is unmarked, which means that it also exists in the Makassarese language). Masjawad99💬 07:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Masjawad99: Re page number, I think the original author (User:Karaeng Matoaya) uses the 1994 revision of the Pelras article as the source for page number. This explains why many of them were out of range in the 1985 version (but in range for the 1994 version). I checked a few citation and they checked out. See my edit in [2]. HaEr48 (talk) 05:33, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I feel like "with the king's power felt from Minahasa to Selayar" needs to be elaborated further. In the body, it is written that "Gowa was thus able to vanquish a staggering number of polities throughout the island of Sulawesi, from the northern Minahasa Peninsula to Selayar Island off the southern coast." The word "vanquish" implies that Gowa once conquered Minahasa and Selayar, which might not be accurate based on the sources.
    • The cited source (Bulbeck 1992 Figure 4-4) does include Selayar and Toli-Toli in the Minahasa peninsula in "Places defeated by Tunipalangga", so those statements seem accurate. HaEr48 (talk) 05:43, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I heard that the Gowa managed to control Sumbawa at some point. Was it during this early period?

That's it for now. I would like to thank you in advance. Mimihitam (talk) 09:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Masjawad99 I also have a question pertaining to this image: File:South Sulawesi between Gowa and the Tellumpocco.png. Could you explain to me the darker blue area that are located between Wajoq, Ajatappareng, and Soppeng? Mimihitam (talk) 09:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They are Lake Tempe and Lake Sidenreng. Yes, the color choice is quite unfortunate (the Gowa-Talloq's color is too similar IMO). I might remake the picture, but it would take some time. Masjawad99💬 22:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished reviewing this article and I support the nomination Mimihitam (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie, Gog the Mild, Dank, and FunkMonk: pinging potential reviewers (sorry for bothering but this FAC needs more attention). HaEr48 (talk) 17:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on pretty shaky ground with this subject, but I'll return if it gets some more qualified opinions. FunkMonk (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Gog the Mild

edit

I'll have a look at this, but it may take two or three days. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:44, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it says "three or four", and this is not much over 30K. And the paragraphs shouldn't be too long. That said, it now reads pretty well IMO; good work.
  • "and innovation on local weaponry" → 'and innovations in local weaponry'
  • "witnessed setbacks for Gowa's campaign" "for" → 'to'.
  • "The early historical period of two kingdoms" Should that be 'of the two kingdoms'?
  • "in which Gowa and Talloq converted to Islam, defeated its rivals in South Sulawesi and expanded its power beyond South Sulawesi to become the most important powers in eastern Indonesia" Is "Gowa and Talloq" the name of one polity or two? If one, then "powers" → 'power'; if two, then both "its" → 'their'.
    • @Gog the Mild: Made it grammatically two for now, but I'm a bit conflicted about this. This sentence was talking about the period when the two kingdoms were very unified. They each had their own royalty, but they ruled as a form of configuration and as far as foreign policy and expansions are concerned they acted as one. What do you think? HaEr48 (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that you need to chose a date or event from which you will consider them to be one polity. This may be arbitrary. The main thing is to be consistent within any given period. (As you weren't here.) It would probably bee worth stating within the article from which date/event you are considering them to be one. I see some parallels with England, Scotland and the United Kingdom.
  • "The early history of Gowa and Talloq witnessed significant demographic and cultural changes as well." → 'The early history of Gowa and Talloq also witnessed significant demographic and cultural changes.'

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • "innovations on local weaponry" "on" → 'in'
  • "Four main ethnic groups inhabited the Indonesian peninsula of South Sulawesi" When was this?
    • The source (written in 1997) writes in present tense, but presumably this applied to the period we were talking about as well, because as far as I know there have been no large scale ethnic migration in South Sulawesi which would have made this not true. Pinging Masjawad99 to weigh in. HaEr48 (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • If we really want to be accurate in representing the time period I have to look for another source then. It is there merely to provide some kind of geographical and demographic overview so that people won't get confused whenever there is a mention of "a Makassarese state..." or "a Buginese kingdom..." Masjawad99💬 20:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I agree it's a good overview, and allowing users to know the difference between Makassarese, Buginese, etc. as a background for reading the rest of the article is worth it IMO. HaEr48 (talk) 13:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Caption: the one starting "A woman holding Salakoa... " is not grammatical. Possibly break into two sentences?
Apologies - you are correct. I misread it.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All of those look appropriate to me. If I do spot any more I will change them and post the diff so that you can check that you are happy. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:22, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to Islam in the 1600s decade" → 'to Islam in the first decade of the 1600s'. (Assuming that that is what is meant.)
  • "halt Gowa's eastbound expansionism" "eastbound" → 'eastward'.
  • "The erstwhile Karaeng Gowa was exiled east" I am not sure what the "exiled East" bit means.
  • "During this period, Goa and Talloq embraced Islam" a) Does "During this period" refer to the former or the latter of the periods mentioned in the previous sentence? b) "Goa" → 'Gowa'.
    • Latter. Updated to clarify.
  • "Gowa won a series of victories against their neighbors" "their" → 'her'.
  • "Gowa's expansions covered most of Sulawesi" → 'Gowa's expansion [no's']extended to most of Sulawesi' or similar.
  • "as well as overseas in parts of eastern Borneo, Lombok in the Lesser Sunda Islands, as well as the Aru and Kei Islands in Maluku" It would be better if you could avoid saying "as well as" twice in the same sentence.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • "ruled by small chiefdoms with populations only in the hundreds" Optional: Delete "only".
  • "well-fed by both the Jeneberang River and the monsoon rains" "well-fed" → 'well-watered'.
  • "The export of rice both encouraged political centralization as the elite accumulated and competed for foreign luxury goods..." Do you mean 'The export of rice encouraged political centralization as the elite both accumulated [accumulated what?] and competed for foreign luxury goods' or 'The export of rice both encouraged political centralization [and something else] as the elite competed for foreign luxury goods and...'?
    • I think the original writer intended to combine these two sentences: "the export of rice encouraged politcal centralization..." and "the export of rice led to continuous agricultural intensification and expansion..." I have split the sentence for clarity. Masjawad99💬 22:03, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Wet rice agriculture quickly increased in Gowa and its environs as in the rest of South Sulawesi, with large swathes of formerly unoccupied land settled and farmed." To my eye this seems to duplicate what has been stated in the previous paragraph. Delete?
  • "The mobilization of the rice surplus" I don't think that "mobilisation" makes grammatical sense in this context.
  • "The mobilization of the rice surplus also supported foreign trade on an unprecedented scale" seems to cover much the same ground as "The export of rice both encouraged political centralization as the elite accumulated and competed for foreign luxury goods"
  • "Another momentous process in Gowa and Talloq's early history" Optional: "momentous" is a bit of a word to watch; consider changing?
  • "the early history of the script remains shrouded in mystery" Peacocky? Perhaps 'the early history of the script remains mysterious'.
  • "was pervasive even on a popular level" "on" → 'at'.
  • "and other forms of continuities" → either 'and other forms of continuity' or 'and other continuities'.
  • "authority derived from the spoken word more so than literacy" Optional: I am not sure what "so" adds. Suggest either deleting it. Also consider 'authority derived from the spoken word more than the written'.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:43, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • In my strong opinion, Bulbeck's list is not appropriate in this article. "The table of twenty two attributes presented in Bulbeck (1992) is produced below" and the list, with a brief explanation should be moved to a new article. (Possibly titled "Secondary state".)
    • I think it is still useful to show which of the attributes of early statehood that have been achieved by Gowa in the period covered by the article. Also, what Bulbeck means by "secondary state" =/= early state. Masjawad99💬 23:56, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Historian Anthony Reid argues" → 'The historian Anthony Reid argues'.
  • "that labor for infrastructural projects were recruited by landed nobles" "were" → 'was'.
  • "historian William Cummings" → 'the historian William Cummings'.

Notes:

Phew!

I will go through your changes and queries tomorrow, and then reread the whole thing. It is looking very solid to me. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Good work right through that process. Outstanding:

  • You will need to pick up the missing ISSNs and locations if you are to pass a source review - or even encourage an editor to start one. Shout if you have problems with this.
  • I have made some copy edits. Please let me know if I have made any errors, or if you don't understand why I have made any.
  • Bulbeck. A potential 'deal breaker'. I will come back on this.

Gog the Mild (talk) 14:42, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Bulbeck
edit
  • "the population of Makassar and its environs ... or even grew as much as tenfold". Going to the source you cite, are you quite sure that "immediate hinterland" corresponds to "Makassar and its environs"? That would not be my reading, but I have not gone through the whole source.
    • This refers to the "coastal" area in the source, which increased ~3x in the 1992 source and revised to 10x in the 1994 source. I replaced it with the precise definition used by Bulbeck (3.6 km from the coast). HaEr48 (talk) 17:13, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that the inclusion of the population density 'sea of numbers' table does not help a reader and would be much better summarised in prose; indeed, I would argue that you have already covered the key findings above them and that the tables are superfluous. If you really insist, I can grit my teeth and let this go, but I would feel that you were doing a disservice to a fine article.
  • The twenty two attributes table needs to go. (I don't even see that it needs replacing with prose: "The capability of Gowa's rulers to integrate foreign expertise with local society allowed sixteenth-century Gowa to satisfy eighteen of the twenty-two attributes offered by Bulbeck as the "more useful, specific criteria" for early statehood." seems entirely sufficient to me. If you think that further explanation is necessary, add it in prose.) I am happy to get into a more detailed debate over this, but hope that this will not be necessary. I note that you make no attempt to explain what "Caldwell's six criteria", which I think is appropriate; but that you devote more space to the 22 attributes than you do to "War against the tellumpocco and the reign of Tunipasuluq".

Gog the Mild (talk) 12:15, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys. Thanks for taking on board my comments re Bulbeck. Rereading them I fear that I may have come across as more assertive than I meant to be. If I did, apologies. This is a splendid article, an example of Wikipedia at its best in a difficult topic area and I am happy to support. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:52, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: No apologies needed at all (at least not to me). I really appreciate your taking the time to give feedback and explaining your reasoning, especially given that it seems unattractive to most reviewers due to its rare topic area. HaEr48 (talk) 19:32, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Nah, now the article seems much better and easier to read. Thanks for all the feedback and support! Masjawad99💬 21:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images

edit

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:07, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

edit
  • The map showing the location of Gowa and Talloq could be moved up to be the lead image top right of the article.
  • "Gowa and its coastal ally Talloq[a] became the first power to dominate". Surely this should be "powers".
  • You have two refs in the first paragraph and none in the rest. The usual practice is that the lead is not referenced as it summarises the referenced main text.
  • "enabled by wide-ranging administrative and military reforms" "enabled" sounds awkward to me here. Maybe "as a result of"
  • "largely unconnected to foreign technologies and ideas." Quotations should be attributed inline. Ditto "went over to Melaka, then straight eastwards to Banda. For three years he journeyed, then returned."
  • "Manuscripts in this genre are arranged chronologically, listing important events such as births and deaths of aristocrats, construction projects, the arrival of foreign delegations, natural disasters, to peculiar events such as eclipses and the passing of comets." Not wars?
  • I would link "toponym".
    • Replaced with "place names" which should be easier to understand.
  • "Only after the rise of Makassar" This is confusing. You have previously used "Makassar" to refer to the people, but you here seem to be referring to the town. Maybe "Only after the rise of the town of Makassar".
    • Replaced with "Gowa and Talloq" to reduce confusion between Makassar the town and Makassar the people. 16:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
  • "The most celebrated of his accomplishments" Obviously of Tumapaqrisiq Kallonna, but as he has not been mentioned since the middle of the previous paragraph, you need to say so.
  • 'Reign of Tumapaqrisiq Kallonna' The last paragraph has apparently random comments in italics.
  • "The question over the succession after Tunibatta's death was resolved" I suggest "Tunibatta's death was followed by a succession dispute which was resolved".
  • "Some of the conceded vassals had previously been subject to Gowa for a century." I am not clear what this means. "Some areas conceded to Boné been subject to Gowa for a century"?
    • Yes, that's what it means. But I removed the sentence, it seems unremarkable to me that area that you have to cede have been with you for a century.
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After the murder of Tunijalloq in 1590, Karaeng Matoaya, the eighteen-year-old son of Tumamenang ri Makkoayang" "After the murder" implies that it has been mentioned previously. I suggest "Tunijalloq was murdered in 1590". Also Karaeng Matoaya was presumably the brother or half-brother of Karaeng Baine, which seems a relevant way of describing him.
    • Tunijalloq's murder is mentioned in the previous paragraph ("...but was assassinated by one of his subjects in an amok attack..."). As for Karaeng Matoaya, he was indeed the half-brother of Karaeng Baine. Added the information. Masjawad99💬 00:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Karaeng Matoaya then appointed Tunipasuluq, Tunijalloq's fifteen-year-old son" Her son or by another wife?
  • "By 1630, Gowa's expansion not only extended to most of Sulawesi, but also overseas in parts of eastern Borneo" I would say "to parts"
  • "However, in the late 1660s Gowa and Talloq were defeated by the alliance of the Bugis and the Dutch East India Company." I would prefer "an alliance"
  • 'Demographic and cultural shifts' section. The first paragraph largely repeats what you have said above.
  • "the toponym Talloq" As above, I would link toponym.
  • "archaeologist F. David Bulbeck" You refer to him here as if it is the first mention of him. You should just say Bulbeck.
  • "new pieces of furniture were introduced" I would say "new types of furniture were introduced"
  • "Another notable process in Gowa and Talloq's early history was the introduction of writing" "innovation" wlould be better than "process"
  • "Francis David Bulbeck" You should just say Bulbeck.
  • A first rate article. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator notes

edit

I don't see that this has had a full source review anywhere (acknowledging some comments by Gog the Mild). I've requested one. --Laser brain (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Laser brain. Pinging Brianboulton as well, given that he did the source review in the first nomination, and this article did not change much source-wise since that review. I've posted in his talk page as well. HaEr48 (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review

edit

I carried out the sources review in the earlier archived nom, and gave it a clean bill of health. Little has changed this then, but there are a few minor points for attention:

  • Verification: some references show wide page ranges, e.g. refs 39 (1–20); 44 (117–160); 108 (1–28); 133 (35–59). It should be possible to be more specific in identifying the precise page number which supports the cited statement.

Masjawad99 Could you help with some of these? Probably there are other instances in addition to what the reviewer noted. HaEr48 (talk) 15:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianboulton and HaEr48: I have added specific ranges for some of them, but I have no access to the other articles/books right now. Masjawad99💬 21:36, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Masjawad99 Thanks. I'll try to take a look at the others, but give me a few days. If we could find a different work that is accessible to support the same statement, that would work as well. HaEr48 (talk) 22:54, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Formats
  • Ref 22 requires pp.
  • Confirm ref 40 page range ("10f5")

No further issues that I can see. Brianboulton (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Early_history_of_Gowa_and_Talloq/archive2&oldid=909689326"